[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Attn Dennis Jones: CVS Windows Build, Visual C++ Project Files

From: Conrad T. Pino
Subject: RE: Attn Dennis Jones: CVS Windows Build, Visual C++ Project Files
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2004 14:00:59 -0700

Hi Dennis,

> From: Dennis Jones [mailto:djones@oregon.com]
> My apologies, but I am very busy right now, and I am not even sure what you
> want me to do at this point.  The link you pointed to regarding a patch:
> http://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-cvs/2004-04/msg00037.html
> ...is not available.  If it becomes available, what should I do...attempt to
> apply the patch to the VC5 project files and see if it still builds?

First of all, I say let's honor your other priorities.

Second, I may have spoken too quickly.  Derek wants to automate absolute path
removal from .dep/.mak files before committing to VC5 to VC6 upgrade.  Derek
also wants to assure we meet your requirements for the nightly build and I
test enough cases so we don't break anything for you which is why I solicit
your input.

However in this case further input from you on this topic won't be needed if
the following align correctly:

1. When all VC project files (.dsw .dsp .dep .mak) in CCVS archive are are
upgraded to VC6, do you see a need for you to use VC5 "Export Makefile..."
to regenerate a .mak files?

2. If Question 1 answer is "Yes", do you want me to check your regenerated
.mak files for absolute path names such that these cases are covered by an
automated removal script Derek has proposed?

3. If Question 1 answer is "No", do you want to test VC6 project files with
VC5 prior to having them committed to CCVS archive?

> I have said that it is okay with me if VC5 support were dropped, as it
> appears that VC5 is currently able to build CVS using the VC6 project files.
> If, at some later date, VC5 fails to build VC6 project files, I will just
> have to live with it the best I can -- especially if I'm the only person who
> is still using VC5 to build CVS!

The following doesn't directly affect you but I'm stating here for convenience.

Derek wants to assure there's a wide consensus for this change and to that end
I published a last request for comment and/or dissent on "Bug CVS" by making
reference to prior discussions in "mail.gnu.org" (which is down right now) and
I deferred to Derek the decision as to when or if the change should take place.
Given the uncertainty of a wider consensus and Derek's other commitments it's
beyond my ability to say when or if this will happen.

> - Dennis



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]